Audioquest CV-6 or Monster M2.2

don't mean to steal your discussion here, but would appreciate if you tell me how much of an improvement the Panther was over M1000I. thanks

A-1, I auditioned some AQ and Monster ICs last year--see http://www.audioasylum.com/audio/cables/messages/108269.html for details. (Also see http://www.audioasylum.com/audio/cables/messages/108165.html for more opinions on AQ ICs.)

The one characteristic of M1000i I heard was its softness--it simply reduced the amount of info coming thru. For example, a beaded cymbal didn't buzz enough, and the richness and complexity of about 2-dozen violins playing together was missing to a small extent.

Do understand that I'm no GEA, but these differences I heard repeatedly. Panther is great-sounding cable, and I expect those with better hearing than mine would be able to distinguish it from the also-fine-sounding Jaguar.
.

Morgan, I use KE-6(8) and KE-4 in my system. When I was using a 2-way speaker, I biwired with that, using KE-4 on the treble. Compared with other good-but-not-current speakercables I had to audition, I found both of these to be much-smoother sounding than the others, including AQ mixed-copper-and-silver stuff from the prior generation. NEVER did I find any silver-conductor cable to be bright sounding--in fact, it was the quality of the KE-4's treble that caused me to buy it. I now use it in parallel with the KE-6(8) driving my Quad 989s.

If one is driving a low-impedance and/or insensitive speaker, probably KE-6(8) is a better choice, as its net AWG of 12.1 will carry more current easily and better maintain bass-damping factor compared with KE-4's 14.5g, but other than that, it's great.

Where are you? (I'm in AZ.) I might have some pieces you could listen to.
.

Jeffreybehr, thanks a lot. so I assume that Jaguar or Panther, either one of them, is a step up from M1000I. I checked out the links, thanks again.